Seanb876

Wow, that is some seriously Fu**ed up logic.
“I’m gonna call myself an “Artist” even though I have no talent, and I’ll just rip off others works, change an element or 2 and call it original!
Now that’s Progressive.

Erik

Seanb876

@Erik,
NO, I believe that “Appropriation” is theft.
If you can’t come up with an original idea on your own than you have no business calling yourself an artist, or a photographer for that matter.
And this notion that “everything has been done already” is a load of crap.
It merely shows how sorely lacking that individual is in both creative talent and intellect.

MarcWPhoto

@Erik, I believe that appropriation art is stupid, immoral, and oh yes, useless.

However, parody and other transfomative use are not appropriation art. There is certainly a place for artist to comment on other artists by transforming their work. Adding guitars and clown hats drawn by a four-year-old for no reason you can even articulate does not qualify. I don’t know what’s art… but I know what isn’t.

Erik

@MarcWPhoto, I think Prince’s Canal Zone show was dull. Was it art? Of course it was, it was simply art that didn’t engage me much. That being said, I think Prince’s Marlboro man work, as well as his Girlfriend work, is absolutely brilliant.

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but if you simply refuse to accept appropriation as a valid artistic practice, you’ll have an endless supply of art that makes your blood boil.

I prefer to reserve those emotions for art that I actually care about.

MarcW

Donnor Party

@Seanb876, I think that is an unfair statement, as there is artistic value in parody and appropriation of pop images for purposes of commenting on the culture generally. Since our culture is image based rather than word based, it is fitting, miet and right, that the visual comments are made using the images generated by the culture. I think Prince crossed the line with the Rasta Images, because they wer enot in the wider stream of commerce, while his Marlboro Cowboy stuff, while somewhat lame for OTHER reasons, was OK. For instance, I sort of like Ron English and his Disney/Marilyn images. I think taking a piss on the complex web signs and symbols and their often confused and twisted meaning is great.

Brent

Maybe rather than wasting money on lawyers, the artists getting ripped off should just have the hands of the person stealing their art ‘n0n-surgically’ removed by Frankie the fish. Cheaper, faster & more effective than a lawyer.

TimR

ResoL101

“Litman claimed that she was “a little disturbed by the reasoning in the decision,” ” if that line doesn’t make you throw up in your mouth a little and question the ethics of parts of the art world then there must be a pretty big set of blinders being worn.

Jim

I don’t think there’s any way to escape the fact that art and the concept of what is art is subjective. We will always have da Vinci who can paint the Mona Lisa, and we’ll always have the guy who takes an image of the Mona Lisa and paints a mustache on it, thus “creating a new work” of “biting social commentary” or whatever spin he puts on it. I guess in my opinion, it isn’t really art if you can’t create it without first having someone else create the majority of it for you.